IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 179
ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF MULTI-STOREYED LOAD BEARING
REINFORCED MASONRY STRUCTURE AND FRAMED RC
STRUCTURE

Shashank B.S
1
, S.Raghunath
2
1
Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering, TOCE, shashankbsbhat.bs@gmail.com, Karnataka, India
2
Professor, Civil Engineering, BMSCE, raghunath.smrc@gmail.com, Karnataka, India

Abstract
Load bearing masonry structures in India are generally restricted to 3 or 4 storeys in height. This is mainly because of lack of
availability of good quality masonry unit and associated workmanship. Also, it is generally perceived that load bearing masonry
storey may perform in brittle manner under excessive lateral loads. However, with the advancement of availability of engineered
hollow concrete blocks which has a scope to introduce reinforcement, it is perhaps possible to design and eventually construct multi-
storeyed reinforced masonry building. In this paper an attempt has been made to analyse and design the structural components of a
multi-storeyed residential building using reinforced hollow concrete block masonry. (i) Residential occupancy in ground floor + 8
floors. The building is analysed and designed for all the load combination as per the codal provisions. Later the same building is
analysed and design by considering it as conventional RC framed structure system. The structural comparison of both of them has
been made. Based on the study it is found that the requirement of reinforcing steel and concrete is significantly lesser, when
compared to building designed as load bearing masonry system. It is also found that masonry prism strength of 7.5MPa with nominal
vertical reinforcement is adequate to withstand the combination of axial and lateral loads.

Keywords: Load bearing, hollow block, Reinforcement, Lateral strength, RC Frame
----------------------------------------------------------------------***------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. INTRODUCTION
There are a lot of arguments about the actuality of reinforced
masonry. Although bricks belong to the conventional and
traditional building materials, reinforced concrete frames are
favored in construction industry nowadays. In that case the
masonry is used purely as an infill wall. The load bearing
capacity of masonry is only significant for the design of some
storey constructions. On the other hand, it is possible to
dispense with RC frame and construct multi storied load
bearing masonry structures, when good quality blocks are used
in conjunction with reinforcement.

1.1 Reinforced Masonry
In India there has not been much progress in the construction
of tall load bearing masonry structures, mainly because of
poor quality of masonry workmanship and material such as
clay bricks that are manufactured even today having nominal
strength of only 7.0 to 10.0 MPa. However recently
mechanized brick plants are producing brick units of strength
17.5 to 24 MPa and therefore it is possible to construct 5 to 6
storied load bearing structures at costs less than those of RC
framed structures.

Reinforced masonry (RM) is more economical and structurally
efficient than framed RC structure
(a) If good quality blocks are produced
(b) If reinforcement is suitably introduced
(c) If the strength and elastic properties are known

In load bearing walls, when the plan length of openings
exceeds approximately one- half the total plan length of the
wall and lateral forces act on the walls whether in- plane or
out of plane, flexural tensile stresses generally become so
large that the walls must be designed as reinforced.
Reinforcement can also be used to increase shear resistance.



Fig-1 Reinforced masonry

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 180
2. STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF REINFORCED
MASONRY
Permissible Compressive Force: Compressive force in
reinforced masonry due to axial load shall not exceed that
given by following equation:

Po = (0.25f
m
'A
n
+ 0.65A
st
F
S
) K
s

Where,
A
n
= Net area
A
st
= Area of steel
F
s
= Permissible steel tensile stress
K
s
= Stress reduction factor as in Table 9 of IS: 1905-1987

The compressive force at the section from axial loads or from
the axial component of combined loads is calculated
separately as is limited to the permissible values. A coefficient
of 0.25 provides a factor of safety of about 4.0 against
crushing of masonry. The coefficient of 0.65 was determined
from tests on masonry.

Permissible Shear Stress for Reinforced masonry members
a) For Flexural members
i). Without Web Reinforcement
F
v
= 0.083 f
m
but not greater than 0.25 MPa
ii). With Web Reinforcement
F
v
= 0.25 f
m
but not greater than 0.75 MPa

b) For Walls
For reinforced masonry, the shear resistance is offered by both
masonry and reinforcement, however, their effect is not taken
additive in this document, like many other masonry codes.
This has basis in an experimental research by Priestley and
Bridgeman which concluded that the shear reinforcement in
masonry is effective in providing resistance when it is
designed to carry the full shear load. If calculated shear stress
exceeds the allowable shear stress for masonry, full shear load
has to be resisted by the reinforcement alone which is placed
parallel to the applied shear force direction. The amount of
shear reinforcement. Experiments have shown that shear
resistance of the reinforced shear walls are function of the
aspect ratio of the wall (i.e., ratio of height to length), besides
distribution of reinforcement and masonry strength. Shear
walls with lower aspect ratio have been provided with higher
allowable shear stress.

3. LOAD BEARING MASONRY ELEMENT-CASE
STUDY
The major objective of this Paper is to demonstrate a
comprehensive design procedure for multi-storied load
bearing masonry building. Typical residential building with
identical floor plans is amenable to be design as load bearing
structure. Avoiding provision of walls out of line with walls in
the underneath floors is crucial. Such a layout will ensure the
avoidance of beam. As a consequence of which excessive
point loads on load bearing walls can be avoided.

At this juncture that it is crucial to identify the load bearing
elements. Here it is provident to avoid considering walls of
significantly small cross section area as load bearing element
in this case study is identified with wall A to Z and A to K
for axial load analysis and for the lateral load analysis it is
identified as 1 t0 54.It can be noticed that the walls for bath
room kitchens (which are lesser than 200mm thickness) is not
considered as load bearing masonry walls.

The process of design as already mentioned is carried out in 3
phases, viz,
a) Calculation of loads
b) Design for axial and eccentric loads
c) Design for flexure and shear



Fig -2: Plan of 1st Floor

3.1 Design of Wall Element Axial/Eccentric Loads
A building is basically subjected to two types of loads,
namely: a) Vertical loads on account of dead loads of
materials used in construction, plus live loads due to
occupancy; and b) Lateral loads due to wind and seismic
forces. While all walls in general can take vertical loads,
ability of a wall to take lateral loads depends on its disposition
in relation to the direction of lateral load. In general a
structural wall shall be designed to with stand axial
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 181
compression, stress due to eccentricity in plane shear and out
of plane building.

3.1.1 Design Loads
Loads to be taken into consideration for designing masonry
components of a structure are: a) Dead loads of walls,
columns, floors and roofs; b) Live loads of floors and roof c)
Wind loads on walls d) Seismic forces.
1. Dead loads shall be calculated on the basis of unit weights
taken in accordance with IS: 875-1 (1987).
2. Live loads of floors and roof shall be calculated on the basis
of unit weights taken in accordance with IS: 875-2 (1987).
3. Wind loads on walls calculated on the basis of IS: 875-3
(1987).
4. Seismic forces on walls is calculated by using IS 1893-2002
part 1.

Table -1: Sample Stress Calculation

W
al
ls
L L
eff
SR
Net
area
mm
2

Loa
d kn
Stress
Devel
oped
MPa
Stres
s
allow
able
MPa
Fac
tor
A
3.6
5
2.9
7
11.
2
72817
657.
1
0.902 2.250
2.4
9
B
3.7
4
1.8
4
9.2
4
74662
997.
8
1.337 2.644
1.9
8
C
3.7
5
1.8
4
9.2
4
74916
107
6.
1.437 2.644
1.8
40
D
4.1
4
3.8
1
11.
2
82800
134
6.
1.626 2.250
1.3
8
E 4.7
4.3
9
11.
2
93878 877 0.935 2.250
2.4
0
F
3.2
7
3.8
1
11.
2
65316
1
991 1.517 2.250
1.4
8
G 4.1
3.4
0
11.
2
82000
0
142
9
1.743 2.250
1.2
9

3.2 Lateral Load Analysis and Design
A building is basically subjected to two types of loads,
namely: 1. vertical loads on account of dead loads of materials
used in construction, plus live loads due to occupancy; and 2.
Lateral loads due to wind and seismic forces. Lateral loads
from the wind or earthquakes are generally considered to act
in the direction of the principal axes of the building structure.
The distribution of lateral loads to various masonry wall
elements depends on the rigidities of the horizontal floor or
roof diaphragm and of the wall elements. If a diaphragm does
not undergo significant in-plane deformation with respect to
the supporting walls, it can be considered rigid and lateral
loads are distributed in various lateral load resisting wall
elements in proportion to their relative stiffness.

3.2.1 Distribution of Lateral Forces in the Piers of a
Masonry Wall
Masonry walls are often seen to be perforated to make
arrangement for windows and doors. The distribution of lateral
force in a masonry wall is dependent on the position of the
openings and the relative rigidity of the masonry piers created
due to the presence of the openings in the masonry wall. The
relative rigidity is dependent on the height by length ratio (h/L
Ratio) of the piers and the end conditions of those masonry
piers as the deflection of the masonry piers due to horizontal
loading changes due to the end condition of the piers. Here a
simple process is described which can be used to distribute the
lateral force in a wall which can be considered to be consist of
some piers with some specific arrangements.

In any kind of placing of opening the wall can be represented
as a horizontal and vertical combination of piers with their
respective end condition which will be used to find out their
rigidities. Where large openings occur, it is difficult to obtain
effective coupling of the wall segments or piers.

Lateral loads shall be distributed to the structure system in
accordance with member stiffness for rigid diaphragms or
tributary areas for flexible diaphragms and shall comply with
the following requirements 1. Flanges of intersecting walls
designed in accordance to IS 1905 draft section 4.2.2.5 shall
be included in stiffness determination. 2. Distribution of load
shall include the effect of diaphragm rigidity and of horizontal
torsion due to eccentricity of wind and seismic loads resulting
from non-uniform distribution of mass

3.2.2 Wind Load Analysis
The wind force calculated from these factors is assumed to act
as an equivalent uniformly distributed load on the building for
its full height. sometimes the wind velocity or the gust factor
is assumed variable with the height of the building ,so that the
intensity of the equivalent uniformly distributed load varies
accordingly in the united kingdom wind loads on buildings are
calculated from the provisions of the code of practice CP3
chapter V Part 2 1970 whilst masonry is strong in compression
it is very weak in tension thus engineering design for wind
loading may be needed not only for multi storey structures but
also for some single storey structures

Design Wind Speed (V
z
) The basic wind speed (V
z
) for any
site shall be obtained from and shall be modified to include the
following effects to get design wind velocity at any height
(V
z
) for the chosen structure:
a) Risk level; b) Terrain roughness, height and size of
structure; and c) Local topography. d) It can be
mathematically expressed as follows: V
z
= V
b
k
l
k
2
k
3
V
b
=
design wind speed at any height z in m/s; k
l
= probability
factor (risk coefficient) k
2
= terrain, height and structure size
factor and k
3
= topography factor
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 182
Table -2: Wind load


Total force = 1048 kN.

3.2.3 Sesmic Load Analysis
The primary objective of earthquake resistant design is to
prevent building collapse during earthquakes thus minimizing
the risk of death or injury to people in or around those
buildings. Because damaging earthquakes are rare, economics
dictate that damage to buildings is expected and acceptable
provided collapse is avoided.

Earthquake Resistant Design-The following steps may be
taken:
(a) Estimate fundamental time period Ta using empirical
expressions given in the Code IS: 1893-10 2002.

(b) Calculate the design horizontal Seismic coefficient Ah
The design horizontal coefficient Ah is given by

A
h
=

Take Z for the applicable seismic zone (IS: 1893 Cl.6.4.2),
Take I for the use importance of the building (IS: 1893 Table
2),

Take R for the lateral load resisting system adopted (IS: 1893
Table 7), and take Sa/g for the computed time period values

(c) Calculate the total horizontal shear (the base shear)
The design value of base shear V
B

V
B
= A
h
W
As per IS 1893 Cl.7.5.3.

(d) Seismic Moments and Forces in Frame Elements:
Calculate the seismic moments and axial forces in the
columns, shears and moments in the beams by using the
seismic weights on the floors/ (column beam joints) through
an appropriate computer software (having facility for using
floors as rigid diaphragm and torsional effects as per IS:
1893:2002).

Table -3: Seismic force on each floor

FLOORS HEIGHT m Q
i
kN
1 3 7
2 6 28
3 9 62
4 12 110
5 15 172
6 18 248
7 21 338
8 24 441
TOTAL 1406

3.4 Design for Shear
Members Subjected to Shear: Reinforced masonry walls
may be designed taking contribution of shear reinforcement.

Where contribution of shear reinforcement is considered in
resisting shear force the minimum area of shear reinforcement
in the direction of force shall be determined by the following:

A
vmin
= V
S
/F
S
d

V = total applied shear force
S = spacing of the shear reinforcement
d = distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of
tension reinforcement
Fs = permissible stress in steel reinforcement

3.5 Location of the Center of Mass
Table -4: Centre of mass calculation

Par
t
B
m
D
m
ARE
A
m
2

X AX Y AY
X
m
Y
m
a1
3.
4
1.
0
3.4 7.3 24.8
-
0.5
-1.7
7.
0
11.
7
a2 12
8.
4
101.3 6.0 607 4.2
425.
4
a3
4.
7
5.
4
25.7
11.
5
296
11.
0
284.
2
a4 12
8.
4
101.3 6.0 607
19.
5
197
5

Flo
or
Heigh
t
M
V
b

m
/s
k
1
k
2
k
3

V
z

N/m
2

AR
EA
m
2

P
z

kN
kN
Wi
nd
for
ce
1 3 5
5
1.0
5
0.8
8
1 50.8
20
60 154
9
111
2 6 5
5
1.0
5
0.8
8
1 50.8
20
60 154
9
111
3 9 5
5
1.0
5
0.8
8
1 50.8
20
60 154
9
111
4 12 5
5
1.0
5
0.9
4
1 54.2
85
60 176
8
127
5 15 5
5
1.0
5
0.9
6
1 55.4
40
60 184
4
132
6 18 5
5
1.0
5
0.9
8
1 56.5
95
60 192
1
138
7 21 5
5
1.0
5
1.0 1 57.7
50
60 200
1
144
8 24 5
5
1.0
5
1.0
9
1 62.9
48
60 237
7
171
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 183
a5
3.
4
1.
0
3.4
7.3
2
24.8
22.
3
75.8
TOTAL 252

177
2
295
8

3.6 Location of the Center of Stiffness
Provision shall be made in all buildings for increase in shear
forces on the lateral force resisting elements resulting from the
horizontal torsional moment arising due between the centres
of mass. And centre of rigidity. The design forces calculated
as in IS 1893 Part 1 clause. 7.8.4.5 Are. To be applied at the
centre of mass appropriately displaced so as to cause design
eccentricity (IS 1893 Part 1 clause 7.9.2) between the
displaced centre of mass and centre of rigidity. However,
negative torsional shear shall be neglected.


Table -5: Center of Stiffness


3.7 Stress in Steel
Table -6: Stress in steel


PIER X Y K
X
K
Y
K
X
Y K
Y
X
1 1.23 0.1 4.0E+07 6.9E+05 4.0E+06 8.5E+05
2 4.24 0.1 3.8E+05 1.1E+05 3.8E+04 4.7E+05
3 5.48 0.1 3.8E+05 1.1E+05 3.8E+04 6.0E+05
5 5.82 -0.5 5.9E+06 2.9E+05 -2.9E+06 1.7E+06
6 6.47 -1.2 5.9E+06 2.9E+05 -7.1E+06 1.9E+06
8 8.79 -1.2 2.7E+06 2.2E+05 -3.3E+06 1.9E+06
9 9.44 -0.5 2.7E+06 2.2E+05 -1.4E+06 2.1E+06
10 9.98 0.1 1.1E+06 8.2E+07 1.1E+05 8.2E+08
11 13.65 0.1 2.7E+05 4.7E+06 2.7E+04 6.4E+07
PIER NO
FC
MPa
NET COMPRESSION
MPa
TOTAL
MPa
STRESS IN STEEL
MPa
1 1.59 2.022 3.613 253.99
2 0.02 2.174 2.190 0.93
3 0.02 2.174 2.190 0.93
4 0.31 2.095 2.401 31.13
5 0.31 2.095 2.401 31.13
7 0.14 2.755 2.891 11.94
8 0.14 2.755 2.891 11.94
9 0.01 2.162 2.168 1.38
10 0.00 2.755 2.758 0.35
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 184
3.8 Allowable Shear Stress
Table -7: Allowable Shear Stress


3.8 Shear and Bending Force

Table -8: Shear and Bending Force



4. REINFORCEMENT DETAILING
From the design we came to know that the nominal
reinforcement is enough to ensure flexural stiffness of the
building. But to ensure shear force the web reinforcement has
to be provided at every bed joint.

Minimum Reinforcement Requirements
Vertical reinforcement of at least 100 mm
2
in cross-sectional
area shall be provided at a maximum spacing of 3 m on centre
at critical sections:
a) Corners
b) Within 400 mm of each side of openings,
c) Within 200 mm of the end of the walls

Reinforcement around openings need not be provided for
opening smaller than 400 mm in either direction. The
masonry shall be uniformly reinforced in both horizontal and
vertical direction such that the sum of reinforcement area in
both directions shall be at least 0.2% of the gross cross-
sectional area of the wall and minimum reinforcement area in
each direction shall be not less than 0.07% of the gross cross-
sectional area of the wall. Reinforcement around openings
need not be provided for opening smaller than 400 mm in
either direction. Horizontal reinforcement shall consist of at
least two bars of 6 mm spaced not more than 400 mm; or bond
Pier
no
SHEAR
FORCE
d B
SHEAR
STRESS
BENDIG
MOMENT
ALLOWABLE
SHEAR STRESS
MAX ALLOWBLE
SHEAR STRESS

N/mm
2
m m N/mm
2
N/mm
2


N/mm
2
N/mm
2

1 3.42E+01 2.35E+03 200 0.073 3.84E+01 0.47 0.22 0.17
2 7.13E-01 3.75E+02 200 0.010 8.02E-01 3.00 0.23 0.2
3 7.13E-01 3.75E+02 200 0.010 8.02E-01 3.00 0.23 0.2
4 9.31E+00 1.00E+03 200 0.047 1.05E+01 1.12 0.23 0.2
5 9.35E+00 1.00E+03 200 0.047 1.05E+01 1.12 0.23 0.2
6 4.73E+00 7.50E+02 200 0.032 5.32E+00 1.50 0.23 0.2
7 4.71E+00 7.50E+02 200 0.031 5.30E+00 1.50 0.23 0.2
8 2.07E+00 2.00E+02 3650 0.003 2.33E+00 5.62 0.23 0.2
9 5.20E-01 2.00E+02 915 0.003 5.85E-01 5.62 0.23 0.2
10 5.16E-01 2.00E+02 915 0.003 5.81E-01 5.62 0.23 0.2
PIER NO
Force in each pier Along X IN kN Along Y IN kN
Along X kN Along Y kN Shear force Bending force Shear force Bending force
1 7.49E+01 1.53E+00 3.11E+01 4.39E+01 1.51E+00 1.55E-02
2 7.09E-01 2.44E-01 6.84E-01 2.46E-02 2.42E-01 2.47E-03
3 7.09E-01 2.44E-01 6.84E-01 2.46E-02 2.42E-01 2.47E-03
5 1.11E+01 6.51E-01 8.83E+00 2.26E+00 6.44E-01 6.59E-03
6 1.11E+01 6.51E-01 8.83E+00 2.26E+00 6.44E-01 6.59E-03
8 5.14E+00 4.88E-01 4.49E+00 6.45E-01 4.83E-01 4.94E-03
9 5.14E+00 4.88E-01 4.49E+00 6.45E-01 4.83E-01 4.94E-03
10 2.01E+00 1.82E+02 1.99E+00 2.04E-02 4.12E+01 1.40E+02
IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 185
beam reinforcement shall be provided of at least 100 mm
2
in
cross-sectional area spaced not more than 3 m. Horizontal
reinforcement shall be provided at the bottom and top of wall
openings and shall extend at least 500 mm or 40 bar diameters
past the openings; continuously at structurally connected roof
and floor levels and within 400 mm of the top of the walls.



Fig-3 Reinforcement details

5. DESIGN OF RCC FRAME
The procedure for analysis and design of a given building will
depend on the type of building, its complexity, the number of
stories etc. First the architectural drawings of the building are
studied, structural system is finalized sizes of structural
members are decided and brought to the knowledge of the
concerned architect. The procedure for structural design will
involve some steps which will depend on the type of building
and also its complexity and the time available for structural
design. The principle objective of this project is to analyse and
design a multi-storeyed building [G +8 (3 dimensional frame)]
using STAAD.Pro. The design involves load calculations
manually and analysing the whole structure by STAAD Pro.
The design methods used in STAAD-Pro analysis are Limit
State Design conforming to Indian Standard Code of Practice




6. COMPARISION BETWEEN RHCBM AND RC
FRAMED STRUCTURE
Design parameter for the comparison purpose: 3 main
parameters of the building considered, viz steel concrete and
blocks. The slab quantities are almost same for the both type
of the building hence it is neglected in comparison. The total
quantities of steel and concrete of the RC framed building is
obtained directly from the Staad,Pro software.

Table -9: Comparison between Rhcbm and Rc Framed
Structure


7. CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Concluding Remarks
Multistoried load bearing masonry building in India is
emerging only recently. Indeed there are hardly any examples
of reinforced masonry system building, despite masonry
possessing good many advantages. In this project the analysis
and design of reinforced hollow concrete block masonry as a
load bearing member for G+8 storied residential apartments
has been presented comprehensively. The design itself has
been carried out for all the combination of load which includes
vertical and lateral loads. Nominal masonry strength of
7.5MPa has been chosen for the design. While the walls
designed for axial and eccentric loads as per IS 1907-1987 and
draft code of reinforced masonry, the lateral loads design have
been carried out as per the accepted structural analysis
principles.

Based on the analysis and design the following broad set of
conclusion can be drawn.
1) It was found that masonry strength of 7.5MPa with H1
grade mortar is sufficient for the vertical/eccentric loads for
almost all the walls. Only 2 out of 34 walls needed a nominal
vertical reinforcement.
2) It was noticed that for the typical building plan chosen in
Bangalore the earthquake loads are marginally higher than
winds for G+8 configurations. Hence the lateral load design of
wall based on critical combination of DL, LL and EL.
3). Since, the analysis and design calculations are quite
involved, a series of spread sheet were developed to identify
the crucial design parameter for each wall of the building. The
spread sheet includes:
MATERIAL RHCBM RC
FRAME
1 Steel 3 tones 30 tones
2 BLOCKS in number 40000 40000
3 CONCRETE only
for grout filling
45 m
3
170m
3

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 03 Special Issue: 06 | May-2014 | RRDCE - 2014, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 186
a) Design for axial and eccentric load for all the walls;
b) Obtaining lateral stiffness and relative stiffness of all the
walls;
c) Analysis and design for flexure and shear.
d) Analysis for all combination for axial and lateral loads.
e) Analysis for including the effect of torsion.
4) Based on the analysis and design it was found that lateral
load combination along shorter dimension of the building was
more critical. This is to be expected because of relatively
lesser lateral stiffness along this direction. However the
criticality depends on the configuration of load bearing wall. it
is suggested that as for as possible there has to adequate
amount of stiffness along the considered critical lateral load
direction.
5) It was found that the flexure stresses were within the
permissible limit and hence nominal reinforcement is
adequate.
6) The shear stress exceeded allowable stress limits for
significant numbers of wall. Therefore the design needed
provision of web reinforcement. This web reinforcement is
suggested at every bed joint of masonry element.
7) The same building was design as a conventional RC framed
structure. The analysis and design carried out by using
structural analysis software. By comparing the material
required for the both building approximately it is noticed that
the load bearing masonry structure is significantly more
economical than RC framed structure.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my mentor and guide Dr. Raghunath S,
Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, BMSCE,
Bengaluru, for his constant encouragement, guidance and
support, which enabled me to complete this project.

I would like to thank my Parents and friends for their
encouragement and support.

REFERENCES
[1]. Narendra Taly (2010), DESIGN OF REINFORCED
MASONRY STRUCTURE S, Second Edition New McGraw-
Hill New York, Professor Emeritus Department of Civil
Engineering California State University, Los Angeles.
[2]. A.W. Hendry (2004), DESIGN OF MASONRY
STRUCTURES Third edition of Load Bearing Brickwork,
Published by E & FN Spon, an imprint of Chapman & Hall,
26 Boundary Row, London SE1 8HN, UK .
[3]. MASONRY STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR
BUILDINGS - DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY, THE
NAVY, AND THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC, 30
October 1992.
[4]. REINFORCED MASONRY Lecture notes of Dr. S
Raghunath, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering,
BMSCE, Bangalore.
[5]. EUROCODE 6: Design of masonry structures EN 1996-1-
1 General- Rules for reinforced and unreinforced masonry.
[6]. K.S. Nanjunda Rao, STRUCTURAL MASONRY:
PROPERTIES AND BEHAVIOUR, Department of Civil
Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
[7]. IITK-GSDMA GUIDELINES for STRUCTURAL USE
of REINFORCED MASONRY, Dr. Durgesh C Rai
Department of Civil Engineering Indian Institute of
technology Kanpur.
[8]. Structural Use of Unreinforced Masonry by Dr. Durgesh
C. Rai, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur.
[9]. Structural Masonry Designers Manual- W. G. Curtin, G.
Shaw, J. K. Beck and W. A. Bray, Third Edition revised by
David Easterbrook Blackwell.

BIOGRAPHIES
Mr. Shashank B S studied at one of the esteemed
college BMSCE BANGALORE and working in
THE OXFORD College of Engineering
Bangalore as a Assistant Professor.

Dr. S. RAGHUNATH, Professor at the
BMSCE Bangalore in Department of Civil
Engineering with more than 25 year of
experience. Published about 30 papers in
National and International journals and
supervised more than 40 PG project works